On Oct. 27, the Texas Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by the State of Texas in its legal dispute against the San Antonio Independent School District (SAISD) over the district's mandate that its employees receive a COVID-19 vaccine.
According to court documents, SAISD previously mandated that its employees receive the COVID-19 vaccine by October 15, 2021. The State argued that this requirement violated gubernatorial executive order GA-39. However, the district court denied the state's request for a temporary injunction, and the court of appeals upheld this decision. In response, the state appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Court's decision was influenced by recent legal developments. In June 2023, the Court ruled in Abbott v. Harris County that GA-38, an executive order prohibiting local mask requirements, was a valid exercise of the Governor's authority under the Disaster Act. Also, on September 1, 2023, Senate Bill 29 came into effect, stating that no governmental entity, including a school district, can enforce a mandate requiring a person to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Moreover, both GA-38 and GA-39 had expired by that time.
Given these changes, the Court determined that the appeal had become moot as there was no longer an enforceable vaccine mandate from the ISD, as it was prohibited by Senate Bill 29, and the executive order GA-39 had expired. The remaining disagreement between the parties concerning the scope of the Governor's authority in potential future disasters was considered a mere "abstract question of law," and any judicial opinion on this matter would be impermissibly advisory.
Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal as moot, vacated the judgment of the court of appeals, and granted the State's request to vacate the opinion of the court of appeals. The Court emphasized that vacating the court of appeals' opinion was in the public interest, as it conflicted with the Court's previous opinion in Abbott v. Harris County and the State had been unable to challenge it on the merits due to mootness.
Case number 22-0775